Subscribe to this blog

Follow by Email

Search This Blog

Greenpeace's Angry Kid Backfires

We all know that Greenpeace is a natural when it comes to needless fear mongering, but this latest "public service" video on energy and global warming has to take the cake:

If you slide over to YouTube, reading some of the comments there is pretty instructive:

God, this video convinces me, I really do hate GREENPEACE. Even their name is a misnomer!!

I'm definitely voting AGAINST his future.

I'm an enemy, kid. Definitely an enemy. If the world is going to be left in your hands, I say let's destroy it now. This ad makes me want to start my car and let it idle in the driveway all night. Every night.

As I've written before, I'm sympathetic to the aims of many environmentalists. But time and time again, groups like Greenpeace lower the level of public debate, and actually make it harder to implement real solutions.

All manner of causes use children to promote their agenda. Even NEI has featured cute kids running through green fields in its various media ads and publications. Why is it considered unfair for Greenpeace to do this, but not for others?

I know this won't make it past the moderator but it's a point worth making.

Of course, using children for advertising is as old as advertising itself. Everybody does it. Some do it better than others, but that's not the point.

If Greenpeace wants to use fearmongering to influence the public (and ... oh yes, they do), then they would do well to take notes on the effective use of children in an ad, such as the "Daisy" ad from the Johnson presidential campaign of 1964 (perhaps people of your g-g-g-generation might remember that one, Mr. Gunter). That was a brilliant ad.

The Greenpeace spot, however, is pathetic. I just can't see how a bratty-looking kid, who sounds like he's pissed off because his parents didn't buy him a new skateboard, is supposed to influence anybody's opinion on anything. It doesn't even do the fearmongering well. What is this kid going to do? Toilet-paper your house? Vandalize your mailbox? Am I missing something here?

Frankly, I'm disappointed. For the amount of money that Greenpeace takes in, you would think that they could do better stuff than this.

I don't see what really backfired, although I didn't think there were that many crazed right-wingers total to write that many comments.

Face it. While it might be a bit goofy, that video represents mainstream environmental opinion and probably mainstream American opinion. Whole Ecology--the idea that humans are a part of the environment and not distinct from it--does not in any way imply the opinions expressed in the YouTube comments, but normal people are getting associated with them nonetheless. Unfortunately, scientific thought is a rarity in this debate: We. Are. Going. To. Lose. The only thing we can do is complain as loudly as possible.

One other thing: global warming is caused by the emission of insulating gases into the atmosphere. The greenhouse effect refers to a precise process which does not include nuclear waste (or anything else the mainstream of the environmental movement has decided to dislike) at any point. People who try to associate every single thing they don't like with global warming are doing a massive disservice to public literacy. And there might just be a few people who disagree with this notion who aren't part of a "monied interest lot."

And "gunter," to paraphrase Commissioner McGaffigan, I'm going to go off the topic because you went off the topic. I want a quote on this waste issue: it has been demonstrated fairly well that nuclear waste is actually only about 1% waste (mine to cask), that the resulting unused fuel represents not only 500 years' worth of electricity at today's consumption level but also the bulk of the long-term radiological hazard, and that reactors are capable of using the aforementioned unused fuel safely with a reprocessing process that does not extract plutonium or produce liquid waste (pyroprocessing). Now let's say the federal government caps spent fuel production, kills Yucca Mountain, and orders the industry to either manage the waste themselves in a way that reduces it to the activity of natural uranium or stop making it. What exactly is wrong with closing the cycle in that manner?

It's interesting that the commenters all seem to assume that the "kid" in this ad is actually talking to adults/parents. It seems to me that Greenpeace is actually aiming this at teenagers and young adults as a recruitment campaign. It's probably pretty effective in this way. And there is no reason to be burdened with facts in that kind of campaign. "Us against Them" is all that has ever been needed to mobilize youth.

It is simply part of the childish psyche to be swayed by things that look "cool" or "tough", or to be part of what is considered by one's peers to be a popular or "in" movement. Think back to when you were a child or teenager. Probably the number one thing in your life was to be accepted by a group or clique, to feel like you belonged to something, to feel like you were wanted and held in regard by those you thought were important. This appears to play on those immature emotions.

Popular posts from this blog

For more than 100 years, the shape and location of human settlements has been defined in large part by energy and water. Cities grew up near natural resources like hydropower, and near water for agricultural, industrial and household use.

Hard to say with precision, but Third Way, the non-partisan think tank, asked the design team at the Washington, D.C. office of Gensler & Associates, an architecture and interior design firm that specializes in sustainable projects like a complex that houses the NFL’s Dallas Cowboys. The talented designers saw a blooming desert and a cozy arctic village, an old urban mill re-purposed as an energy producer, a data center that integrates solar panels on its sprawling flat roofs, a naval base and a humming transit hub.

There's an invisible force powering and propelling our way of life.
It's all around us. You can't feel it. Smell it. Or taste it.
But it's there all the same. And if you look close enough, you can see all the amazing and wondrous things it does.
It not only powers our cities and towns.
And all the high-tech things we love.
It gives us the power to invent.
To explore.
To discover.
To create advanced technologies.
This invisible force creates jobs out of thin air.
It adds billions to our economy.
It's on even when we're not.
And stays on no matter what Mother Nature throws at it.
This invisible force takes us to the outer reaches of outer space.
And to the very depths of our oceans.
It brings us together. And it makes us better.
And most importantly, it has the power to do all this in our lifetime while barely leaving a trace.
Some people might say it's kind of unbelievable.
They wonder, what is this new power that does all these extraordinary things?

If you think that there is plenty of electricity, that the air is clean enough and that nuclear power is a just one among many options for meeting human needs, then you are probably over-focused on the United States or Western Europe. Even then, you’d be wrong.

Billions of people live in energy poverty, they write, and even those who don’t, those who live in places where there is always an electric outlet or a light switch handy, we need to unmake the last 200 years of energy history, and move to non-carbon sources. Energy is integral to our lives but the authors cite a World Health Organization estimate that more than 6.5 million people die each year from air pollution. In addition, they say, the global climate is heading for ruinous instability. E…